United States v. Chahia

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• finding that a six and one-half month delay was not presumptively prejudicial in light of the large amount of discovery
• recognizing “a ‘district court’s discretion is at its zenith when the issue [of a continuance] is raised close to the trial date’” (quoting United States v. Whitehead, 487 F.3d 1068, 1071 (8th Cir. 2007))
• finding that delay between indictment and trial was “too short a time period to be presumptively prejudicial” and thus concluding that it “need not consider the remaining factors to find that no Sixth Amendment speedy trial violation occurred”
• finding that delay between indictment and trial was “too short a time period to be presumptively prejudicial” and thus concluding that it “need not consider the remaining factors to find that no Sixth Amendment speedy trial violation occurred”
• delay of approximately seven months is not presumptively prejudicial for speedy trial purposes

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).